It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Attacks by aliens on our Sovereignty are getting more severe - no respect for our laws

page: 6
41
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: MisterMcKill



Not really. Liberals actually think those billions of dollars in aid would go to help the economies of these poor nations.


Libturds?
Critical Cathari!! Monstrous Masons, all of them!!!

Burn, Bush burn!


"Across the earth, America is feeding the hungry. More than 60 percent of international emergency food aid comes as a gift of the people of the United States…. Millions are facing great affliction, but with our help, they will not face it alone. America has a special calling to come to their aid and we will do so with the compassion and generosity that have always defined the United States." - Mr Presents G.W. Bush

Bringing Hope to the Hungry
1954-2004


Wait! Not a Libruhl you say? Oh sh!t. Unsee this ASAP!



But... but... but ... still. Gonna kill some unarmed kids for freedom, right? I mean... there could be WMDs as well, and unarmed aliens pose an enormous risk to the abductional security!




edit on 7-3-2019 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-3-2019 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-3-2019 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
Monstrous Masons...


Redundant.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Reeeeeeee-dundundun_dent? Libruuuhl Liaaaar!

Let's wait and see what we see our Critical Cathari posting about that, Augmented Augustus.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion


He posts what I make him post.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ker2010

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

What about all those other countries where the US just stomps over their sovereignty?

You don't like the taste of your own medicine?


And BINGO. You hate America right? Be honest. You just know all these people coming over are gonna eventually collapse this great country and you get a chubby off of it.

Country is done folks.

Texas goes blue in 2028 due to demographic changes, the end of a republican president EVER being elected, the rest of the country follows CA lead and starts to look like it. Say that will never happen? Might wanna do a little research and then come back.

America becomes Mexico/Honduras!! YAY!!!

I hope everyone making light of the situation leaves their kids/grand-kids enough in the bank to hopefully migrate themselves and get out of what this country will eventually become.

Thats if there is a country worth a damn to migrate to.

Big ole bad America defeated without one single shot.

Its time for people to stop worrying about the kids/adults crossing the border and worry about your OWN goddamn kids future.


I don't hate America. The American experiment in human rights and fair government was beautiful and so incredibly hopeful.

But I a pragmatist.

Look at what that beautiful experiment has become, a nation that:

- Spies on its own citizens.
- Where money and corporate power usurps the legal rights of the individual.
- That is militaristic and belligerent.
- That utilizes economics to opress both its own citizens and the wider world.
- That cannot deliver universal health care despite enormous GDP.
- That tries to marginalize and ignore its homeless and destitute.
- That openly antagonizes minorities.
- Where citizens are terrified of being outed as 'different' in any way.
- Where all its news media are partisan and primarily deliver opinion more than balanced reportage.
- That espouses 'liberty' but incarcerates more of its citizens and a greater percentage of its population than any other country in the world (by far) and that was one of the last countries in the world to abolish slavery.
- That is ruled by an oligarch that was not elected by popular majority and who is under parallel investigations for various abuses of power.
- That encourages the distribution of weapons among its population, the primary actual use of which is suicide.

... to name a few things.
edit on 7/3/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I knew it! Satans Stinker the (un)paid and unhinged pos(t)er-child.

Things could slowly start to make some sense (with regards to this alien agenda of reduntiloids) if you wouldn't be such a bad, bad good liar.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik


The way I have seen it applied contradicts your interpretation.

Application is not necessarily correct. The easiest way to make a law into an abomination of law is to allow it to be applied by TPTB without questioning if they are applying it as written.

Let me ask you this: if a law said it is illegal to rob someone, would you question it if the police started using it to persecute people who didn't mow their lawn often enough? That's a ridiculous example, but the thing is that it is a possible example, if no one dared question application.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut


I don't hate America. The American experiment in human rights and fair government was beautiful and so incredibly hopeful.

Verb tense seems to indicate otherwise. It sounds to me like you didn't hate America, but do now.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


What fun is it if the foreigners don't hate us? I have a solid gold straw I'll loan you to suck the salty tears of jealousy off their cheeks.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
Application is not necessarily correct. The easiest way to make a law into an abomination of law is to allow it to be applied by TPTB without questioning if they are applying it as written.

So?


Let me ask you this: if a law said it is illegal to rob someone, would you question it if the police started using it to persecute people who didn't mow their lawn often enough? That's a ridiculous example, but the thing is that it is a possible example, if no one dared question application.

You said 8 USC § 1157 does not override 8 USC § 1325(a/b). I said the "physically present in the United States" part of 8 USC § 1157 creates a special circumstance which does override 8 USC § 1325(a/b). That is my interpretation and also it seems to be how it is applied.

Question away, it is still just your interpretation and doesn't change reality.




edit on 7-3-2019 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Sounds like fun!

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik


You said 8 USC § 1157 does not override 8 USC § 1325(a/b). I said the "physically present in the United States" part of 8 USC § 1157 creates a special circumstance which does override 8 USC § 1325(a/b).

How is it possible to cross the US border without being in the US afterward?

If it is not possible to do so, it is not a special circumstance.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut


I don't hate America. The American experiment in human rights and fair government was beautiful and so incredibly hopeful.

Verb tense seems to indicate otherwise. It sounds to me like you didn't hate America, but do now.

TheRedneck


I haven't lost hope. Out of 320 million people, there has to be heaps of untapped potential.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: TheRedneck


What fun is it if the foreigners don't hate us? I have a solid gold straw I'll loan you to suck the salty tears of jealousy off their cheeks.


Ah, an American sucking up unhappiness through their gold straw. Sounds an apt metaphor.

You see, not all of us are sad. Some countries are notably happy places.

Ohh, look where mine are!




posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

Ah, an American sucking up unhappiness through their gold straw.


I typically use it to suck the spinal fluid out of children but I'm all about adapting my diet to what's available.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
How is it possible to cross the US border without being in the US afterward?

If it is not possible to do so, it is not a special circumstance.

That is the point.

It is not possible but the law says someone who is can apply for asylum, that means it creates that special circumstance. It does what you say it doesn't, it overrides 8 USC § 1325(a/b).


edit on 7-3-2019 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik


That is the point.

It is not possible but the law says it can be, that means it creates that special circumstance. It does what you say it doesn't, it overrides 8 USC § 1325(a/b).

I believe there is a legal principle (this one I don't know the name of, sorry... actually not a lawyer, just a hotrodder from the 70s) that states that a law must reference another law before it can remove that law. In other words, a law must be removed, not just rendered moot.

I think I came across it studying Supreme Court opinions a while back...

Anyway, on principle I disagree with that entire concept. I believe the courts would too, at least the higher ones.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

But one law isn't removing the other in this case.

Just like killing someone in self defense doesn't remove the law against murder, it just creates a situation where the law does not apply.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

That's my point. As it is interpreted (as in nullifying 8 USC § 1325 by stating 8 USC § 1158 indicates some right to asylum once on US soil), the conditions in 8 USC § 1158 are a direct, unavoidable consequence of the crime in 8 USC § 1325. That renders 8 USC § 1325 moot, because one cannot cross the border illegally without then being in the US with the illegal border crossing nullified.

That cannot be. It is the legal equivalent of an oxymoron.

The only reasonable interpretation I can conceive of is that 8 USC §1158 allows for asylum in the sole discretion of the immigration officers acting under orders from the Attorney General. That is the only way asylum can be allowed as a legal remedy without nullifying all illegal border crossings.

And that is therefore my interpretation. I know it isn't being followed, but it is entirely possible for a corrupt official to ignore or even purposely misinterpret laws for personal gain.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
The only reasonable interpretation I can conceive of is that 8 USC §1158 allows for asylum in the sole discretion of the immigration officers acting under orders from the Attorney General. That is the only way asylum can be allowed as a legal remedy without nullifying all illegal border crossings.

The way it is allowed is by an illegal asking for asylum, which then makes 8 USC § 1325 not aplicable in that one case. It does nothing to any other illegal border crossing.




top topics



 
41
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join